Member Info for NotMuchMoney

Thanks Pbow. Agreed, that's why I expect the TAM drilling to have started and progressing well, as knock-on impacts on other deliverables.

The MD&A still says ESIA submission targetting Q3 2025. Hopefully that is correct.

With apologies for late post, MD&A confirmed Perry Holloway left 2nd April.

Surprised to see Christina Robinson still employed - Director of Operations and Comms. Both have been pretty terrible since she started under Scott's tenure and frankly, I think she should have been booted.

I find the MD&A the only real way of knowing what is going on. Albeit a few months out of date.

It's little things that would help, e.g.

- Tandayama drilling programme was due to commence early May. Has it started? i.e. confirm progress being made

- G Mining Phase 1 was at 74% (end-March); what is the current position and what is outstanding/timescales?

- ESIA still on track for Q3?

- Tailings investigation progress etc. etc.

Addicknt / Pbow - in your calls with the chairman was investor relations and comms brought up?

In particular whether Solgold will fill the IR vacancy and start doing some proactive investor engagement?

Appreciate Dan is still in his 'first 100 days' as CEO, but not like he wasn't already familiar with operations and people.

I'm very surprised we haven't had more updates or an investor call arranged. I think these were hinted at, but as we've grown used to with Solgold, slow or no progress.

Pbow - could I encourage you to just filter the lunatic?

Don't want you to get targetted and frustrated and then stop posting. Your research and insight is appreciated here.

Fort - I wonder what BHP's average is? Easy to refer to their purchase at 45p but what about participation in other placings?

A contrarian view to BHP and NEM still holding is no-one showed an interest in their stakes? No point "doing a Berry Street" and crashing the SP via sale on open market.

In terms of interest, block cave (high initial capex and operational risk) and the political situation are the main concerns. Previous CEOs have regularly talked about the political side.

If Cascabel was an open pit I think it would have been sold by now.

Equally, if it was an equivalent block cave in Canada/Australia/Chile again I think it would have been sold.

The combo of high capex and uncertainty over permits/environment in Ecuador have held things back.

That said, I believe there are still many interested parties. Most who haven't needed to rush and have let Solgold balls things up for a few (or more) years.

But when management eventually get there, ticking off major the de-risking items (permits, DFS, prove the financing is possible) then they will act.

DBW, respectfully there is nothing "strong" about SOLG's cash position this year.

The Jiangxi share sale was 'forced' to be able to get to the 2nd tranche of Franco funds.

No spare cash to progress any of the regionals. Although hopefully there is a plan underway to address that via ExploreCo.

Agreed addicknt. Your post was appreciated.

Such a shame that the behaviour of people like needalife and Jack/BBG/IP limits what people are willing to post and reduces company willingness to engage.

No Needalife, this is simply an example of the educated vs. the uneducated.

Suggest you do some reading on inside information, disclosure and transparency rules (DTR) and SMCR regime.

Needalife - you seem a very sad and bitter individual.

Is there any difference if addicknt's information came from investor relations rather than the Chairman?

What exactly has addicknt shared that is price-sensitive? In my mind nothing, simply that the Chairman has his head screwed on, is aware of the challenges/frustrations, and trying to steady the ship.

A real shame LSE admin can't remove disrupters like you who want to prevent the sharing of relevant shareholder information.

I hope any replies from LSE admin / SOLG / Franco highlight exactly how childish and simple you are.

Hi Pbow

I agree Scott's salary and pay-off is disgusting given the previous messaging around aligning with shareholder value.

That said, I think some of the figures you quote include the fair value of share options (c$700k). Hopefully these will be forfeited in light of performance and missed milestones.

Some 'highlights' (cough):

Cash:

- At end-Q1 had cash of $18m. So strip out the $18m received from Jiangxi towards end of March and they were pretty much out of cash.

(Noting timing of concession payments made in Q1 unknown). You can understand why Chairman saw 45% premium as a success.

Salaries and payoffs:

- Scott still has his 30m options for now (90 days expiry would be early June).

- Scott's payoff: "includes a lump-sum payment of US$319,615 pursuant to a mutual separation agreement". WOW.

- appears DC's legal settlement was c$600k

- another 10m of options were awarded to employees in April (on top of 15m to Dan and 5m to Chris). Would that be to the chairman?

Progress on Feasibility study / Tranche 2

- G Mining at 74% completion of Phase 1 of FS

After the positivity of addicknt's conversation with the Chairman, back to Earth with a bump...

Www.sedarplus.ca/landingpage/

Must say I disagree with "The plan for the development of Cascabel will be available by the end of the quarter. PS sees this as a hugely important step and the absence of one in the past is one of the reasons no one was interested in buying."

Solgold always had a plan (many a Gannt chart over the last decade). Big PFS. Reduced PFS. PFS Addendum. Tandy and open pit potential.

The problem was Solgold kept on changing the plan (ironically because I suspect no-one was interested in buying).

Not sure I believe this quarter's plan will be the final plan either. Unless it finally is a plan that encourages someone to buy.

As Bozi says, surprised about the NEM comment. If Jiangxi want those shares, for a low price, I really don't see what the company can do. Hostile stake or not.

And I suspect interest would turn hostile in 12-24 months anyhow, which is why I don't want the company reliant on Jiangxi funds and advice.

Thanks addicknt.

I presume the MD&A will (/should) confirm SC loses all his options, given his failure to deliver?

Rodney, without wanting to split hairs, only 1 director (CEO) was awarded 15m of options. The other (CFO) was awarded 5m.

Completely agree re: the terrible option prices and directors not putting theirs hands into their pockets to buy shares themselves. But, as you point out, quite a regular occurance for a SOLG-type company.

Regarding your other inferences, who knows how relevant these are to SOLG. But frankly, very little shareholders can do about it.

If Nick starts lining his nest then I'd be worried. But for now, better progress is being made under Dan than the last 2 years of intertia.

Quady. I don't follow what you mean by 0.2% 'just about made it economical'.

Using 0.16% in the PFS, the project is clearly economical (i.e. the NPV and IRR).

I may be over-simplifying it, but plan would be:

Initial open cut (at Tandayama or Alpala) = lower initial capex to generate cashflows

Then block cave = higher initial capex but targets the higher grade core = higher subsequent cashflows

Then continued block-caving = targetting the lower grade, but with advantage of block-caving being substantially cheaper for volumes than open pit

Quady - nice to see you posting on Solgold matters for a change.

Are you sure you have understood the cut-off grade correctly? I believe it is the grade at which the deposit can be economically mined.

i.e. a lower cut-off % is better (although I appreciate this has impact on mining volumes and costs, tailings etc).

The cut-off grade could easily be less than 0.16%, given the increase in metals prices vs. those assumed in PFS.

Oh no, it appears chatGPT also now works on behalf of BHP!

Next item to discuss will be MD&A. I will be very surprised if any positive news released before this.